In this interview with KAMARUDEEN OGUNDELE, the Secretary-General of the Nigeria Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, Prof. Ishaq Oloyede, insists Muslims are underrepresented at the National Confab
Specifically, how did President Goodluck Jonathan’s selection of delegates offend the Muslims?
I think it is not a matter of offence. It is a matter of observation which we made to Mr. President. That is, it is in our view unfair by whatever means to select 184 Muslims out of 497 delegates. We have 497 delegates contrary to the 492 that is being widely reported. The delegates are 497, excluding the principal officers. If you add the principal officers, it is 503.I explained that just to let you know that there is an error even in the number that is being reported. If you look at the programme booklet, after the 497 names, the government came up with an addition that is funny, and you say it is 492 instead of 497. We believe that out of 497, if there are only 184 Muslims, which is just about one-third, it is unfair. We felt that it was deliberate, and that is why we did not go to the streets. We did not encourage the Muslims to protest; rather, we lodged a complaint with the highest authority in the land. That is what we did.
Don’t you think it might just be a sincere oversight instead of reading religious connotations to it?
Yes, the President said it was an oversight, but it is very difficult for the Muslims to believe that. But for me, the President appeared sincere. I sympathise with him because my perception is that the President meant well but was derailed by the people around him who had their own selfish agenda. I want to believe the President when he said it wasn’t intentional. I think Muslims should accept that it wasn’t intentional. Let us hope that the mistake won’t be repeated. Let us also think that other Nigerians will recognise that oversight and therefore do not further aggravate the situation by thinking that Muslims are troublemakers because they complained. If it had been the other way round, we believe even the press would have risen against whoever must have been responsible.
Were the Muslim members of the delegation satisfied with the President’s explanation?
I do not see anybody in the delegation who disbelieved the President. What others were saying was that what was reported in the media from sources close to the President suggested that there were people close to him that were hell bent on derailing his lofty ideas. You can go and find out what happened contrary to what some people are trying to sell in the media. There was a subtle way of misrepresenting what happened that couldn’t have come but from sources that could be official.
Why is the issue of religion becoming volatile among Nigerians nowadays?
To me, I believe that religion or ethnicity or any of the differences could become issues particularly in the face of poverty. When you talk of sharing of limited resources, various interests would come in. It is possible that such interests would want to play up one trick or the other. In my view, I believe it is diversionary to be talking of ethnicity, religion, and the things that divide us. I believe it is diversionary. But the only way of addressing it is to be balanced. When people were talking of three-quarters, two-thirds, people did not ask why. It was because of the imbalance. It was because of the fact that some people felt short-changed. The real issue was not mentioned. What was mentioned was the externality of the matter. The issue clearly was that people who were under-represented felt that it was deliberate. Even if it was not deliberate, they felt they are threatened and therefore, they had to look for devices that would protect them against the onslaught of the undue majority.
Is it not possible to shelve religious sentiments when discussing national issues?
When you talk of religious sentiments, especially when they are baseless, there is no need bringing them up. But that does not mean when there are genuine complaints bordering on religion, such should not be listened to. The point I am making is that if people believe that the Muslims or Christians want to be represented in a place, to me, I do not see any issue out of it. The real issue is, do not allow politicians to use ethnicity or religion to distract us from the main issue to an extent that the Muslims and Christians will start fighting over issues that have no direct link with their survival.
Even at the confab, some Christians have called for Biblical court – to be an equivalent of Sharia court. Is such a call justified?
I am not a Christian, so I have no view about it. The only thing I want to say is that when you say the mentioning of Sharia in the constitution favours Islam, it’s just like when you look into the Bible, it talks about Lucifer, Satan, devil more than one hundred times; specifically 107 times. That does not make the Bible satanic. I believe in all the places where Sharia is mentioned, it is mentioned in order to restrict the implementation of Sharia. When you go to the Nigerian Marriage Act, the statutory marriage law, you will find terminologies that cater for church marriage. Church marriage is mentioned, the minister is mentioned. The Marriage Act provides for Christians what the Sharia Court of Appeal and other Sharia jurisprudence in the constitution provide for Muslims. So for me, I have nothing against somebody having a religious court. My own issue is that it is better to look at issues critically rather than looking at issues from a pedestrian point of view. You must look at the substance of the matter.
Do you agree that religion seems to be tearing Nigerians apart today?
I don’t believe that. I believe those who are wise will not allow religion to tear people apart. Religion is a unifying factor. If you know the number of ethnic groups in Nigeria, I understand they are two hundred and fifty. If you have any problems, it is just between two groups. In any case, if religion is properly understood, it will not cause any confusion; it will not cause any division, rather, it will unite the people.
Some Nigerians think much effort is dissipated on religious issues. Do you agree?
I don’t believe we are spending so much time on religion. People are just deceiving one another with religion. Religion is what so many people hide behind to commit so many atrocities. It is because we are a country where people are largely sentimental. If you belong to my religion and do something bad, instead of telling you, I will play about it. Or if you belong to my ethnic group, there is this ‘it is our turn’ syndrome. I think that is what is happening. Religion per se is not the issue, but people use religion for selfish purposes. They use that to promote disunity among poor people. When people want to go to the Corporate Affairs Commission, you see people across ethnic and religious groups coming together to form a company. It is when it comes to the welfare of the people that religion becomes a factor. They use ethnicity to further exploit and divide the poor in order to ruin them, not just to rule them.
Because of the activities of Boko Haram, some Nigerians have become very intolerant of Muslims. Can you blame them?
It is a myopic view. The effort to demonise Islam is an issue. When a non-Muslim does something, he is called by his father’s name. But when a Muslim does it, it is a Muslim that does that. Today, you don’t have cases of armed robbery in the North. Any violence is blamed on Boko Haram, as if they have eliminated robbery and all other crimes. This thing also happens in other parts of the country. But those people are called by their fathers’ names. That is why we should not glamorise criminality. Anybody that commits crime should be treated as a criminal. We should stop glamorising crimes by utilising religious label or demonising a particular religion. It is wrong. People should be treated on their own merit. As far as I am concerned, whether Boko Haram activities or any other type of violence, what is bad is bad. Islam has no apology because anybody can call himself a Muslim. We believe that Islam does not preach violence. If you know what is happening in Uganda and Central African Republic, people have used religion to perpetrate violence. People will not say they are Christian fanatics. I think it’s a problem of underrepresentation in the media, whereby western propaganda is against Islam.
As a Muslim leader, do you carry a moral burden because of Boko Haram?
Not at all. Who carries the burden of all other crimes being committed in the country? People commit crimes and they should be so treated. They should be treated as individuals and not part of a group. From the beginning of this problem when there was a bomb blast in 2010 in Abuja, before investigation, people had started pointing accusing fingers until Okah and others came out to say they were the ones. Even when they said so, some people still wanted to pin it down on others. Go and see the defence of Okah in South Africa, you will be surprised by the level people can go to criminalise Islam. Attempts were made, if not that those people insisted, that would have been counted as part of Boko Haram onslaughts. People are committing all kinds of atrocities and they are going scot-free because it is easy to label them Boko Haram, then no investigation.
Some Muslim leaders have come out to disown Boko Haram, but the group always alludes to Quranic injunctions to back up their actions.
Islam does not allow anybody to indiscriminately kill innocent people without the due process of law. Anybody can make any claim.
Would you say Boko Haram members are not Muslims?
I don’t know since I don’t know them. The Federal Government knows them and it is the government that should be asked that question. For instance, security is one of the duties of the government. To provide security is not my duty; I don’t take security vote. People who are taking security votes should be held responsible for security problems. The government should get to the root of the matter. In the past, we could say we didn’t know who Boko Haram members were but the President came out to tell us that they were in his cabinet, which means he has information which we do not have. I believe by now, the issue of ‘we don’t know them’ should not arise again since we have a large number of suspects in government custody. Apart from that, I also think that if we are serious about curbing the menace of violence in the north, we should grant access to scholars of peace, scholars of religion to interact with the suspects. But now, we don’t even know who is Boko Haram or not because it is easy for anybody who doesn’t like your face to dub you as Boko Haram. Before the person knows it, he is in prison. When he shouts, nobody believes because there are people detained who are not Boko Haram members. Look at one of the sheikhs who was killed recently in Zaria, this man was accused recently of being a Boko Haram member even when he was preaching against the group. When he was eliminated, the people arrested said he was murdered because he opposed their activities. What type of security system criminalises somebody who is innocent? I think there are people around the President presenting those they do not like as enemies of the nation and enemies of the President. We need to scrutinise some of these claims. I believe some of the pronouncements of the public relations officer of the State Security Service need to be verified concerning the recent shooting at the SSS headquarters, popularly called Yellow House. When you subject some of the claims to intellectual analysis, you will see that they cannot stand. A situation where you say somebody who was handcuffed disarmed people to the extent that you now killed 21 persons. Oh! How do you defend that? There is something missing somewhere. I believe we need to be careful not to create a situation that we will leave the substance and be pursuing the shadow. We have a serious threat to the nation, yet some people are playing politics with it. They are playing politics of religion and ethnicity. They want to destroy the foundation of this country simply because they want to score an ethnic or religious point.
How best can Boko Haram insurgency be solved?
I believe in sincerity and open-mindedness. I believe we should get to the root to proffer remedy. But if we look at it from the point of demonising a particular group, we may not get to the root of the problem. Security agencies should also be very careful because these days, Muslims have some very strong doubts about the neutrality of some of those who carry out security operations to the extent that Muslims are alleging that they are being killed without justification and innocent persons are being accused unjustly.
How best can Nigerians live together in peace?
Understanding and justice. Let us practise what we preach. Don’t say something in the closet and say another thing in the open. That is wrong. What we should do is to be sincere. Once we are sincere and firm in what we are doing and are disciplined, I do not see any problem.
As a confab delegate, what Islamic issues do you propose to put up?
Good governance and sincerity. If you look at the operation of the government, you will see that we are very wasteful. Some people have argued that we need devolution of power from the Federal Government to the federating units. In Islam, whatever is good is Islamic. Whatever that is for the good of the people is Islamic. Whatever is inimical to the good of the people is considered anti-Islam. As far as we are concerned, we do not have any peculiar Islamic agenda. What we want is justice. We need a statesman who is just. It does not matter where the president comes from. Once we are sure of justice, this cleavage of religion will be a thing of the past. All we need is a forthright and sincere leader.
Why is the Christian Association of Nigeria always saying notable Islamic leaders don’t condemn Boko Haram in the open?
I don’t know why because the Muslim leaders are not the public relations officers of the government, police or the armed forces and they do all that they can do within their power. So if somebody is still saying they are not doing enough, then that person should be asked what else he wants them to do.
As the national coordinator of Nigeria Inter-Religious Council, are you enjoying support from Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor since he took over from Cardinal Onaiyekan as CAN President?
I don’t want to answer that question. It is better left to the observation of the people. NIREC is making efforts to continue to survive and be relevant. We try to derive 80 per cent of our resources outside the Federal Government. Despite this, the 20 per cent from the Federal Government is not forthcoming. So, that is why you have a lull in the activities of NIREC. As soon as the government provides its little quota, NIREC will meet and continue to carry out its mandate. In the past, the Federal Government provided the 100 per cent of the resources to my predecessor. But this has not been so in the last two to three years.
What is responsible for this?
I am told it is due to lack of fund.
Have you made efforts to reach the government?
We try every time. In the last four months, we have been on this to host the first quarter meeting.
Do you have any advice for your fellow delegates?
We should think Nigerian and act Nigerian. Nigeria is a great country and will continue to be great if we all collaborate, understand one another and work sincerely for the development of this great country of ours.
Copyright PUNCH
No comments:
Post a Comment